First they came for the coal industry, now for oil and gas: West Australian EPA decides state must meet “Paris” alone

Suddenly, with five minutes warning, Western Australia may be going it alone to meet Paris on behalf of Australia. Not because an elected government decided that, but because of five people chosen by a state Minister. Who is in charge here? The West Australian EPA is a QUAGO (quasi-autonomous-and-governmental organisation) – paid by the government, but magically “independent” of it. They are annointed saints charged with protecting “the environment” but as far as I can tell, that does not include the dominant fauna nor the entire plant kingdom.

Tens of billions of dollars in new resource projects will be at risk after Western Australia’s Environmental Protection Authority announced tough new measures around carbon dioxide emissions.

WA has only 10% of Australia’s population but generates more than a third of the national exports. Or it did. Watch this space…

The new regulations will affect planned projects such as Woodside Petroleum’s $US11 billion ($15.6bn) Scarborough gas project and its $US20.5bn Browse development, as well as existing projects such as the $US34bn Wheatstone LNG plant and the $US54bn Gorgon LNG plant.

This will also affect Rio Tinto, BHP and Fortescue Metals as well.

…

The oil and gas industry is up in arms:

“Not only will this proposal put at risk new jobs, investment and domestic gas supplies, it positions WA at a competitive disadvantage in the global LNG marketplace,” Woodside CEO Peter Coleman said in a statement.

Dare I suggest that the oil and gas industry could’ve been helping to explain to Australia how damaging the Paris agreement and pagan weathercraft is. They partly benefit from the anti-CO2 mantra as it hurts coal, and boosts gas. But when we live in a namecalling fantasy land, this attack on them is utterly logical and was inevitable like the rising sun. There is a certain element of reap what you sow. First they came for the coal industry…

Would you like unemployment with that?

Predictably Their Australian ABC promptly interviewed a green activist Piers Verstegen, Conservation Council. He gets free advertising-time to say an “independent study” (that his team paid for) shows it will create 4,000 jobs out of thin air. If the ABC asked me, I’d point out that international studies (that I didn’t pay for) showed that for every new green job at least two jobs were destroyed, and the only time that didn’t happen was when things were even worse. In Spain two jobs were lost, in the UK it was four, and in Italy — five. At best, if 4,000 green jobs are created then the we hope we only lose 8,000 jobs — it could be so much worse.

The Paris Agreement is The Problem

Even if it is non-binding, voluntary and pointless it allows every 2-bit judge and tinpot agency to make grandiose grabs for power on behalf of globalists everywhere. Logically, the quickest fix here is to Get Out of Paris.

The authority’s chairman Tom Hatton told reporters in WA the move was necessary because Australia was not on track to meet its Paris targets and the current policies of the federal government “are not going to deliver the outcomes as currently applied that are necessary for Australia to meet its international obligations under the Paris agreement”.

Under the guidelines developers proposing projects with direct emissions of more than 100,000 tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent per annum would be required to demonstrate they have taken all “reasonable and practicable design measures”, including use of renewable energy, to reduce or avoid emissions. -- The Guardian

Someone doth protest too much:

ABC news — 3mins 45sec: Tom Hatton, “there’s no political motivation from these guidelines, they come strictly from considerations to protect the West Australian environment.”

Given that Western Australian emissions of CO2 will change global temperatures by 0.0 degrees C, saving no plants and stopping no droughts, this has got nothing to do with science or economics. If this is not political it’s witchcraft.

Where does the buck really stop?

Who is making the decision that counts? The EPA website tells us it advises the government. But the newspapers are reporting this decision as “announced”. The ABC said the guidelines mean projects producing more than 100,000 tons must show how they will reduce or avoid emissions. Does that mean that the state government can theoretically ignore it, or does it mean that all resource projects have to get EPA approval, so the EPA are de facto Kingmakers?

In the last election campaign, The McGowan government dumped its own plans to set higher emission targets like a hot potato. Obviously they worried that the public wouldn’t want that. Is this a way to get around the democratic process? McGowan takes the advice and just pretends this is out of his hands? Where is the government for the people, by the….

The EPA, which works independently and makes recommendations to the WA government about whether new developments should be granted environmental approval, said on Thursday it was setting a “higher bar” for how it would assess the impact of major projects on the climate.

If the EPA was funded by Exxon would the Guardian call it “independent”? If it were just an advisory body would it say it was setting a higher bar, or suggesting a higher bar?

On the upside, at least the national imbalance of GST payments will even up. Instead of WA sending money to states that won’t use their own resources, WA will join them on the welfare line. But when every state has their hands out for money, which state will Make Australia Rich Again?

VN:F [1.9.22_1171]

please wait...

Rating: 9.9/10 (98 votes cast)

First they came for the coal industry, now for oil and gas: West Australian EPA decides state must meet "Paris" alone , 9.9 out of 10 based on 98 ratings

273 comments to First they came for the coal industry, now for oil and gas: West Australian EPA decides state must meet “Paris” alone

It’s getting very scary. The stupid is taking over. If we continue down this path nothing will change until the lights go out, the power cuts off, and the water supply stops. (Water supplies need electricity to function.)

Get your retaliation in early, and don’t let up. I’m hopeful that we have the situation i.e. the pollies, under control in Godzone. But the probability of a much bigger protest has increased as the stupid continues to burn. http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0309/S00040.htm

Greenies are employed by BIG guv to manage us. Better that they be employed staring out of a window with NOTHING to do and NO-ONE to manage. A soft work prison so to speak. Getting these people to do anything costs everyone. It far less expensive to pay them to do nothing but manage that nothing so they do not get money to do something.

Precisely.
We should run out of fuel, power, prosperity, piano wire and lamp posts in roughly that order.
Then the Nuremberg Climatism Trials may begin around the same time the UN is largely defUNed and returned to core business, the UNFCCC, UN IPCC, UNEP, ECOSOC, UNESCO, et al. dissolved, and the array of neo-Marxist cults solely created to control (Globalism, Gaia, Rainbow, Climatism, Healthism, Safeism, Environmentalism), expunged from civilised society, politics and discourse.

Half the problem is the timidity of the big corps; we saw this with the Rocky Hill coal mine decision in the LEC by the head judge, a former green activist who set up the EDO which represented the dozen greenies. The company did not even dispute the ridiculous ‘science’ presented by ‘expert’ will steffen.

If the gas corps had any they would have these bureaucratic greenies in court.

Hate jumping on first post line but..isnt it amazing that two oil fields as big as the finds in Bass Strait are about to be proven in the Canarvon Basin. With our TOTAL loss of self sufficiency, you would think two fields in 90m of water would be a good thing for Australia.

“Not only will money and jobs be at risk, but so will any plant which uses CO2″
As cogent and pertinent as this article is this one point is in error.
All of WA’s environmental pretensions discussed in this EPA rule will have no measurable effect on atmospheric CO2. (https://tambonthongchai.com/2018/12/19/co2responsiveness/). It is demonstrably true that increasing CO2 has been good for the biosphere and blaming humans for the increased CO2 is the central pillar of the AGW movement so this is a natural counter to their argument that “It is all bad” but it wont stand scrutiny. To me this means that the rest of the AGW predictions of doom that rest on that same pillar have no foundation. Obviously I think this is important information to get out to the public and positions.

[DMA, I reread that line myself ten minutes after publishing, realized it overstepped, and changed it. You must've been very fast to comment. "Great minds..." - Jo]

Yes we can turn things around and it is very simple to do so. All that is required is for voters at the coming federal election to smash both major parties and allow the ACP and ON to hold the balance of power in both houses of parliament. Will it happen? I doubt it very much given most Australians are still asleep, clueless or don’t give a damn. We get the government we deserve.

Things will only turn around when the electrical supply ceases and/or the electricity bills consume most person’s income. Until then the people will be the proverbial slowly boiling frogs, in a state of complete torpor.

Agree. I was referring to the general population as a nation. When a nation such as ours goes down the wrong path the consequences are spread across all the people regardless of whether they agree or not with the direction. Of course there are ways to mitigate the impacts if one is aware and prepared but it’s virtually impossible to escape them completely unless one moves to another country or nation.

Are you happy to leave Australia’s future to those economic vandals also known as the Greens?
Are you left deeply uneasy at the thought of our immigration policy in the hands of Labor’s globalists?
Are you underwhelmed or even fearful of the precarious state of the Liberal/National coalition?

Sent to me by Kevin Bailey AM
Australian Conservatives Senate Candidate for Victoria

All they care about is power over and subjugation of the people. That’s their evil nature. The CO2 is just a vehicle to propagate their agenda. If it wasn’t that it would be something else, such as global cooling.

It is almost identical in New Zealand.
The usurpation of civil power by the welfare state through an orchestrated cultivation of socialist dependence, a treacherous neo-Marxist ideologically imbued MSM, ideologically infected and programmed educators and teachers, virtue signalling globalist corporatists and their multitudinous ranks of political stooges … who is left to don the yellow shirt in Australasia?

So Australasia is as ever lingering behind the curve of history, while an ever growing number of rational countries around the World, in Europe and in South America divest themselves of the political chancre of globalism and increasingly embrace populist nationalism, economic security and cultural identity in a process of retraditionalisation.

The up coming European elections in May may well mark the end of globalism and neo-Marxist business as usual, the hallmark of the indistinguishable political centre Left/Right, with its social pathology and cultivated loss of identity, culture, borders and country.
Instead, a collaborative globalisation born of independent free and prosperous nations will take up the mantle of prosperity and progress, as both the populist nationalist Left and Right reclaim the three securities: economic, border and culture.

The globalism death knell is sounded. It’s over. The signs of the times are as obvious as the ramped up intensity and desperation displayed by the doyens of globalism and their MSM acolytes, who can do nothing to halt the tsunami of rejection.

Remember when they said gas was a good transition from coal? It was just after they said diesel cars were the green choice. They’re the same people who’ll tell you hydro is okay, provided there are no dams, and nukes are okay, provided there are no reactors. Why, even HELE can be a good thing…unbuilt. It’s all the externalities, you see. And (wink, wink) we have to think of those green jobs we could be missing. (I’m told a reformed Weinstein is now promising green jobs to starlets.)

I presume the people who said gas is better than coal, are the same people who are saying we should stop using coal and gas. I assume when they said that gas is better, it was because gas produces less CO2. So gas appliances are installed in millions of homes and businesses. Coal was burned then to produce electricity and still is. CO2 capture and conversion has since developed so that CO2 can be captured from coal burning sites, but it would be difficult to capture the CO2 from the millions of homes and businesses.

As well, renewables produce electricity, so if they get rid of gas, millions homes and businesses will need to change all their appliances from gas to electicity, at great cost and put further strain on an electricity supply system that has been proven unable to cope.

In addition, stopping the coal, oil and gas projects also stops export of the products, which adds the loss of jobs in the export industries. Since it’s difficult to export electricity, these jobs can’t be replaced by similar jobs in renewables energy exports

The eco-zealots will continue until the mining and petroleum industries are on their knees, and then they will administer the final blow. Next they will wonder why the lights went out. Then they will cut down trees for light and warmth. I’d call them useful idiots, but that is an insult to useful idiots…

1. Apart from the urban heat island effect, which is miniscule on a global scale, There is No such thing as Man Made Global Warming via CO2.

2. There has been and still is very real pollution from many human activities but human origin CO2 is not a pollutant.
Fix the Real Pollution.

3. Most of the worst pollution in the world is a result of government inaction. Whether governments are bought or paid to turn a blind eye to cost savings in production they won’t say, but hey, the Man Made Global Warming Scam is a heaven sent diversion.

G!day KK,
Sounds to me that the WA EPA is following the US EPA’s playbook, defing CO2 as a pollutant via regulation:

” When all of WA’s existing LNG projects are in full operation, the industry will be responsible for about 30 million tonnes of direct carbon dioxide emissions per year, or about 40 per cent of WA’s total pollution output, the Conservation Council of WA has estimated. ”

“Regulation” and “guidelines” are a method of changing the rules without having to go to the trouble of changing the LAW.A change to the boxes to tick for approval can be made by the controlling entity without the governing body(the lawmakers)having to shoulder the public response.

Just as “earth day” is declared each year when people are encouraged to switch off their lights for an hour, the fossil industry in WA should declare a “fossil free” day. Switch off all fossil based electricity and gas generation, stop refueling cars, and let the population “party”. And this QUAGO could hold their collective breaths to stop exhaling this evil CO2 that is so damaging to their environment.

The problem is here not overseas. Many hundreds of new coal fired power stations are being built now and over the foreseeable future so the Paris crap is irrelevant. We all know the goal of the ALP+Greens is to reduce our emissions here far more than the LNP’s goal but the difference is moot because both will usher in a crash and burn. The only difference is the approach by the ALP+Green will achieve it faster. The LNP’s approach is to carry out a sort of gracious crash and burn. In the end it makes no difference. Enjoy the ride.

Agreed. I see signs for hope in the LNP and Tony is still there. Guess though if more than 50% are “asleep, clueless or don’t give a damn” they can’t win so ACP, ON balance of power is our only hope. Doug

Today he declared that we must “honour our Paris accord commitment”.
No doubt he said it to curry favour with the city-based leftie/greenies in his electorate and attempt to take the wind out of the downhill skier’s electoral chance sails.
Whatever the reason, it’s a rank betrayal from the man who once said that “climate change is cr*p.”

That’s the end of any meaningful resistance in Canberra down the toilet.

Independent last, Green second last, Labor above Green, LNP above Labor and primary vote for a small party candidate.

In the Senate a small party group.

But the above must depend on the electorate you are in, because of the preferential voting system it is inevitable that the two party preferred system sides will have a majority of seats between them. It is therefore important to support your sitting LNP MP if that person is one of the real Liberals or Nationals. Since 1996 when the Howard Coalition Government was elected for the first time there have been Liberals In Name Only MPs on the left gradually increasing their influence, including Malcolm Turnbull who had much to do with promotion of the problems we now face while undermining the real Liberal centre right.

We have been made aware of the 2019 election “independents” backed by Union Labor, Greens, GetUp and Turnbull & Son. They are obviously targeting the real Liberal MPs and if successful would add to the numbers on the left, objective to form government even if a hung parliament result as in 2010 takes place in 2019.

Unless voters rebel against the socialism globalism leftist push to control our nation the future is grim.

I rather think of him as a globalist. Most globalists don’t care which side of politics they use. They take any side that helps them achieve their evil ambitions. His main drive was to promote a carbon tax os similar so that he could control the masses and instigate a tyranny over the people. It’s mostly about power. Money is secondary although not far behind.

Yes, except lkee many people you completely Misunderstand two party preferred.

When they count the votes they progressively eliminate the party (candidate) with the lowest vote until only two parties (candidates) remain, this is the two party preferred vote. Party is used like in legal matters, they are persons. Two party does not mean labor and liberal, it just means the last two standing persons, could be any or no political party. It’s rather unfortunate they called it two party preferred rather than say the two candidate preferred.

TPP voting gets a lot of bad press but it’s just a way to hold run off elections in concert with the main election. In first past the post if no-one gets 50% then you need to have a runoff election, in TPP voting the run off election just gets conducted using the preferences so you only have to vote once.

Remember too people that no political party actually controls preferences, you decide your own preference flow when you vote so vote below the line and don’t follow how to vote cards. Don’t be led, own your own vote.

Having said that, I do agree that we should be able to say “stop my preference flow here” so you can effectively say my vote should NOT be given to the following candidates. We have that in the Senate, but not in the house election. I think this should be extended to the house of representatives election. I’d add the following change… if no candidate can accumulate a count of more than 50% of registered voters after preferences, then the seat needs to be declared vacant and the election rerun. (IE, if expired preferences and informal votes prevent a 50% winner after prefs then new elections should be held with new candidates in that electorate)

The thing is we have an OPTIONAL preferential voting system, not an enforced preferential voting system. So we can place just the number 1 in a box in the lower house paper and leave the rest blank, and do the same on the Senate paper above the line. If everyone did that we would have effectively a first past the post system.

To clarify.ABOVE the line. Sec 269 1(b).”the voter has marked the number 1,or the number 1 and one or more higher numbers,in squares printed on the paper above the line” Sec 269 Formal votes above the line.

On behalf of my fellow retirees in the states, I’d like to thank the rest of the world
for bolluxing things up so badly that our generally dysfunctional government looks good by comparison.

People with money and other resources, who have mobility, gravitate to areas where resources are treated well.
Whether one has financial or human capital, one can still do well in the states with at least modest protection
for life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness.

When we had our Viet Nam kerfuffle, it was popular to speculate about where one could run to when the US failed.
OZ was a destination of choice then, tho in reality I think there were few who actually migrated.

Most left leaning governments have managed to retain whatever assets have been left them by their country’s capitalist periods,
milking them to provide the promised free stuff until the whole country settles into a complacent and moribund poverty. A few
manage to destroy enough to fail within a generation.

But Why would one want to be the first, tho blessed with enormous natural wealth and geographic advantage, to fritter away a civilization in service to a discredited myth?

The miners are saved…but the canary doesn’t have much of a future. Pull yourselves together, before its too late (the same advice we’re giving ourselves, given the complete imbeciles running for office in our election cycle that is no longer than the gestation period of an elephant.

It may simply be a case of those if us who can, abandoning Australia and leaving, taking our families with us.

It sounds harsh, but the alternative likely involves insurrection and bloodshed, which I dont want my family to have to live through as observers ( and not participants )

I dont think australians have worked out yet that they may literally have to fight for thier freedom from the toxic green overlords. That said, the overlords will get more than they bargained on it thats how it goes…i hope it doesnt. If you start seeing foreign troops turning up under the UN flag…well….

The east coast can now observe WA and see what happens to industry under Green rule. I guess the distribution of GST will have to be further analysed as these Green jobs provide a boom industry for Australia.

A major part of the problem has been entities such as BHP and the business council. Their support for green ideology gives a veneer of not only worthwhile virtue signalling but also commercial responsibility. Hopefully this direct attack on our big mining corporations will make them amend their ways but I’m fearful that groups like BHP and other large businesses have been deliberately infiltrated but global warming activists. At least AGL got rid of their saboteur activist but most other major companies still have greenies in power. This has been reinforced because their major shareholders the big funds also have been infiltrated by managers who believe this ideology.
Hopefully this sort of brazenness by the WA EPA will lead to a revolt by shareholders which will pressure companies to fight back. I’m however not optimistic this will happen.

I agree here. This is why appeasement doesn’t work. By appeasing the vocal green blob, industry gives it a veneer of legitimacy it doesn’t deserve. BHP is chocka full of engineers that believe in the laws of thermodynamics and particularly the law of conservation of energy capable of disproving global warming over a morning tea break, but these companies still don’t speak out for fear of adverse publicity.

RIO Tinto has recently sold all their coal assets to Glencore to get out from under the green foot on their necks. I think this was cowardly, they should have faced it down and told the truth about mining and it’s huge societal benefits.

I have a mission for everyone here, write to your member and candidates. Tell them that you are well and truly sick of them talking down Australia’s biggest industries, and for the sake of everybody they should be talking up mining rather than forecasting it’s demise.

W.A. is lagging behind the times with this. Greens senator Adam Bandt, you know the Greens party that struggles to get 10% of votes, has declared that he has “armies” of people to protest the new proposed super critical power station in the Hunter Valley. In his words he said that the Greens will create civil unrest to prevent any new coal fired power stations ever being built. I used to think there were laws in this country about inciting violence, maybe I’m wrong. I continue to be fascinated by the fact that the future of Australia can be decided by such tiny groups of people !

I think the law needs to be amended so the organizers of protests where laws are broken are on the hook for the compensation, so when Greenpeace organised to block a rail line, the affected pay can get compensation from deep pockets instead of the penniless useful idiot that followed Greenpeace’s order.

The Green sympathiser, pussy judges will still flog them with a feather and let them off because they are “doing good for humanity”. Can you think of a single case where a green protester / rail line blocker / coal loader stopper / power station blockader got what they deserved for their actions?

When the self righteous justification comes from “Peak Bodies”such as the Australian Academy of Science, the people who drive these policy changes see themselves as heroes .[ while being handsomely compensated for it]

I strongly advise having a look at the publications that have been both re-enforced & disguised by re-badging -
Agenda 21> Agenda 2030> “Australia-2050-Conversations-about-our-future”

Morrison and Turnbull’s NEG author Frydenberg are to blame here as well. Having dumped Turnbull and his far-left Liberal policies, Morrison has not done a policy reset and continues to run with the Turnbull policy mix, save for some tinkering at the edges. The Paris Agreement is still firmly embedded in Morrison’s energy policies and its outrageous renewable subsidies. It was only a matter of time before ALP zealots moved to use this platform. Nonetheless, the damage to WA’s resource industry will be substantial. If there is a European recession coming, WA will feel its full effect.

Correct. The LNP hasn’t really changed since Turnbull was dumped. In fact Morrison keeps on harping on how good he is by saying repeatedly the Paris targets will be met “at a canter”. Instead of dumping Paris and retreating from the CAGW scam with much haste he is embracing it. Sure Shorten’s energy policy is worse but so what? Being killed by an RPG is just as bad as being killed by a nuke. So the real problem is not the Paris crap but the lack of a backbone by Morrison. Other countries are building new coal fired power stations like there is no tomorrow yet Australia is ignoring that fact and instead takes the road to crash and burn by doing all it can to destroy its existing coal fired power industry and encouraging renewables. When the proverbial SHTF I do hope Australians finally wake up and do something to rebuild this once great nation out of the ashes before China steps in and “rescues” us.

The NEG was actually the barsted child of Kerry Schott, Energy Security Board boss and anti-coal fanatic. She hasn’t gone away and her beloved NEG is by no means dead and buried. She is waiting for the right moment to spring it on us again, and with a limp dropkick like Morrison in charge she will have no trouble in resurrecting it after the election. With Shorten at the helm she will have an absolute free kick. Expect NEG Round #2 folks.

Start converting apples Annie. Not to hard, and think, you could always run a little bootleg business just to stick it to the man. I had an Italian brother in law who converted everything to the “nectare of the gods”, some good, some not so and some was absolutely beautiful.

Yeah. Just brings the crash closer. Bring it on. It’s the only way the willfully ignorant majority will take their heads out of their arses. And it’s the ONLY way to destroy the green movement.
It’s unavoidable and has been for several years.
I’ll be ready

Alack, Liberal and Labor guvuh-mints in Oz,
think they’re there to rule us, intrude
into every nook and cranny of our lives,
they’re the master and we are but their slaves,
change the Party, still the tyrant-will prevails,
propped up by lap-dog, media-propaganda-knaves.

Just heard an election ad from GetUp on radio this morning. Stop Adani. Stop burning coal. Wonder whether they will campaign in the Latrobe and Hunter Valleys in Vic and NSW and Bowen, Callide, Surat Basins in Qld. Interesting that in Qld, with government declarations of 50% “renewables” target, the Qld govt business website reports: “Coal provides around 30% of global primary energy needs, generates over 40% of the world’s electricity and is used in the production of 70% of the world’s steel. Presently, there are 63 countries worldwide actively constructing or expanding coal-fired power generation capacity. Queensland’s production and exports are expected to rise over the medium to long term based on significant local and foreign investment in new coal mining projects proposed for the Galilee and Surat basins.”

OK then let’s shut down all our coal fired power stations right now and see how popular GetUp remains. It would be a small price to pay just to shut down GetUp as the people would demand they turn back on the power stations with much haste.

It’s a sad indictment on the nature and state of this nation how a party like the ACP albeit young and lacking resources is so unpopular and ignored. Yet it’s by far the best party we have to turn things around and avoid a crash and burn. Perhaps it’s because of the word “Conservative”. I know a lot of people turn their noses when they see or hear that word. I myself am not terribly eager with the term but it’s far better than the other parties on offer. A party called the “Libertarian Party of Australia” would have been more appropriate but then again there are some major differences between conservatism and libertarianism, and I suspect the ACP is more of the former. However, beggars can’t be chooses. Trouble is we appear to have a nation mostly full of fools rather than beggars so the ACP will be a “no show” in the coming election. I’m hoping I’m wrong but so far it doesn’t look good. Wake up people of Australia. Vote 1 for the ACP where possible, ON second, and don’t vote for anyone else.

As far as I know the HOR vote requires full preferences to be expressed so to make a formal vote you MUST number all the boxes, just put the global warmists last. In the senate below the line you must number at least 6 boxes. Make sure your vote counts – don’t follow the advice of anyone who says to mark just one box. So put at least six of the ACP/ON/Libertarian/Conservative independent candidates on you senate ballot and ONP first in the house (as far as I know ACP are not fielding house candidates this election).

The order of Lib/Lab isn’t really relevant any more since they are both globalists. I say put the most pragmatic candidate first, for me that means if your Lib/Nat candidate is on the right wing then vote for them, if they are lefties then toss a coin. This will help purge the socialists from the Liberals parliamentary wing.

The biggest thing is to give pragmatist candidates the balance of power in the senate.

4 Mar: 9News: AAP: Adani says Greens’ coal ban bill dangerous
Adani has warned it will sue the Queensland government for $1.4 billion as well as future profits if it bans coal mining in the Galilee Basin.
State Greens MP ***Michael Berkman has put forward a retrospective bill to ban coal mining in the Galilee Basin.
He wants existing mine leases, including Adani’s, torn up and coal mining in the basin banned forever to ensure Australia can meet its targets under the Paris pact to fight global warming…

Adani Mining chief executive Lucas Dow: “This bill would create enormous regulatory uncertainty and sovereign risk for Queensland, which would extend well beyond simply the Galilee Basin,” he told the hearing in Brisbane on Monday.
“It would have far-reaching impacts, and there would clearly be a legal recourse for what has already been spent and for future profits.”
He said not only would Adani seek compensation the government would face significant payments to third parties…

Queensland Resources Council chief executive Ian McFarlane said the state government could not afford to ban coal mining.
“Without the mining royalty payouts, the Queensland government would be in the red to the tune of $4.6 billion,” Mr McFarlane said…

Mr Berkman said that if the entire basin was mined, this would increase the seaborne thermal coal market by 30 per cent.
“That’s going to drive down prices, that’s going to increase the uptake of coal, and it’s going to mean that we completely blow our Paris targets,” he told the ABC.
“That’s really what this is about. No amount of solar power, no amount of renewable energy of any type, can prevent the most catastrophic consequences of climate change if we dig up this volume of coal.”https://www.9news.com.au/2019/03/04/11/03/mine-kill-bill-dangerous-adani

***Wikipedia: (Michael) Berkman then accepted a position with the Environmental Defenders Office in Brisbane. In this role, he was involved in litigation with a particular specialisation in ground water in cases against Adani’s Carmichael Coal Mine, the Alpha Coal Mine and the New Acland Coal Mine Stage 3 Expansion…
In November 2018, Berkman said schools in Maiwar, Berkman’s electorate, should let students skip lessons to attend a climate change rally. All school principals agreed, according to Mr. Berkman. The rally took place on November 30. Over 400 students attended, demanding climate action…

Ray Hadley/2GB just played excerpts from a David Speers interview with Tony Abbott. presumably it’s new, but I will follow up once I can find a link.

Abbott repeatedly said he didn’t believe we should exit Paris. Speers said so it was exit Paris while Turnbull was PM and now it’s don’t exit Paris. Abbott repeatedly said he had changed his mind because Morrison and Angus Taylor were now in charge or whatever.

Sounds like it conforms with the other public comment. Fred Chaney was on radio yesterday avoiding incriminating comment about climate change and saying that electricity should be generated in a “technology agnostic” way: whatever’s the best for holding down “emissions”.

Don’t these clowns understand that what they are attempting to do (without any scientific foundation) is terraforming and that is strictly a science fiction concept, at least for the earth environment.

7 Mar: Guardian: ‘Now’ is the time for new coal plants, resources minister says
Matt Canavan’s comments come as Queensland Nationals push for ‘immediate’ action to underwrite power stations
by Katharine Murphy
On the imperative of having taxpayers underwrite new investment in new coal-fired power, the resources minister told reporters on Thursday: “I think perhaps the best time to start building a coal-fired power station was 10 years ago, and the second best time is now.”

behind paywall. can’t even find out who the ex-MP is, or if these excerpts are in the correct order:

5 Mar: BundabergNewsMail: Former Labor MP attacks party over coal strategy
It is quite evident that demand for Queensland coal will increase, creating …The total contribution of coal to the Queensland economy in 2017-18 financial year was $43.4 billion, which is 13% of Queensland total gross regional product… industry is in decline demonstrates the obsessive zeal the Left and the Greens embrace in refusing to accept reality and economic responsibility.. … She could resign from parliament, go to TAFE to study hospitality, then find a job…https://www.news-mail.com.au/news/maybe-its-jackie-trad-who-needs-re-skilling/3664364/

Heh, they could use this Australian developed world leading technology of turning CO2 back into coal.

This is not a joke! By reducing CO2 back to C you can just keep burning carbon indefinitely without adding to the atmospheric CO2 load!

It’s just like a perpetual motion machine but your taxes paid for it, in a “university” no less. Just build a power station and connect the CO2 output to the carbon input via this magical process and you will never need to burn any more coal!

TWEET: Malcolm Turnbull Replying to BevanShields, Federal Editor and Canberra Bureau Chief for the Sydney Morning Herald and The Age:
But it isn’t. Today the cheapest form of new dispatchable or base load energy is renewables plus storage. We are now able to have lower emissions and lower prices but we need to plan it using engineering & economics rather than ideology and innumerate idiocy
7 Mar 2019

TWEET: Malcolm Turnbull 17m ago:
The reason the fossil fuel lobby and their apologists rail against Snowy Hydro 2.0, and have tried to stop it, is because it delivers the massive storage which does make renewables reliable and this enable our progress to lower emissions and lower energy prices.https://twitter.com/TurnbullMalcolm/status/1103796543797096448

TWEET: Bevan Shields, Federal Editor and Canberra Bureau Chief for the Sydney Morning Herald and The Age:
Tony Abbott backtracks and now says Australia should NOT withdraw from the Paris commitment.
This suggests he is under real pressure in Warringah on climate change
7 Mar 2019https://twitter.com/BevanShields/status/1103797357961863168

Labor colleague accuses Jackie Trad of ‘conflict of interest’ over Adani …
Townsville Bulletin-9 hours ago
DEPUTY Premier Jackie Trad must “declare a conflict of interest” and step away from negotiations with Adani due to her “anti-mining” stance, in a sensational salvo from a Labor colleague. Labor candidate and Whitsundays Regional Council councillor Mike Brunker
accused Ms Trad of having a “clear” conflict of interest in…

7 Mar: AFR: Big stick stays shelved as Scott Morrison snuffs out Nationals’ power push
by Andrew Tillett
Scott Morrison has shut down the push by restless Queensland Nationals MPs to have Parliament vote on new powers to break up power companies before the election, saying his priority is legislating the budget and flood recovery measures for the Sunshine State.

As well as reviving the so-called “big stick” legislation, the six MPs want the government to lock in underwriting a new power generation project – most likely a clean-coal power station – in regional Queensland to ease pressure on prices before the election.
They outlined the demands in a letter to Nationals leader Michael McCormack, who has come under internal criticism for not doing enough to stand up to their senior Coalition partner.

The government withdrew the forced divestment legislation last month to avoid another potential legislative loss on the floor of the House of Representatives, with the Greens close to securing the numbers to amend the bill to ban the underwriting of new coal-fired power generation.
The withdrawal angered the Nationals but ministers vowed to take the policy to the election to campaign on, enabling the Coalition to attack Labor for being on the side of the big power companies because of its opposition…

Very simple maths – you add carbon taxes to basic commodities – who is going to pay for those? – everyone. And that everyone includes impoverished people in the 3rd. world. So the greenies are using the impoverished 3rd. world to pay for their luxurious lifestyles, their junkets and their vanity projects.

Their 2017/18 annual report mentioned carbon once, in ‘carbon sequestration’ related to Gorgon. Otherwise it was not the slightest concern last year. So the opportunists have won.

Of course there is a lot of money, prestige and real political power in gas in WA. Lots of pressure from overseas.
Shame to stay out of it.

I can think of no other reason as there is no scientific reason to believe CO2 levels are not entirely natural
or that punishing Australians is a great idea.

This is an attack on Australian democracy, unless the government asked for this to get around public opposition.
Now that makes sense.
After all the CSIRO/EPA only have our interests at heart. Don’t they?

How are all the planet saving diesels in Adelaide and Tasmania going? A triumph in Green stupidity, achieving absolutely nothing at great public cost.

In fact you could not imagine the EPA issuing this sudden declaration without the tacit support of their employer, the State government. Obviously they were asked to do it and this request probably started with the Federal Labor party who want to make the Climate Change fairytale the big issue of the coming Federal election. It’s all about Green voters.

7 Mar: OilPrice: Bloomberg Launches Alternative To Green New Deal
By Irina Slav
Michael Bloomberg will not run for president. That was the main outtake from the businessman and philanthropist’s op-ed (LINK) for Bloomberg the other day. But the more important outtake was his announcement of a new climate change initiative: Beyond Carbon.
“I will launch a new, even more ambitious phase of the campaign — Beyond Carbon: a grassroots effort to begin moving America as quickly as possible away from oil and gas and toward a 100 percent clean energy economy,” Bloomberg said…

The goal of this initiative is the same as the ultimate goal on Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’ interpretation of the idea for a New Green Deal first suggested by Tom Friedman. In this interpretation, the 100-percent renewable power, zero carbon emission economy will be the result of efforts including investment in renewable power, boosting the grid’s energy efficiency, and building smart grids that distribute affordable power, and investing in things like sustainable farming and new, emission-free, transport…

It’s clear enough that such a massive undertaking would involve a huge amount of money. No wonder, then, that Republicans in Congress blasted the New Green Deal as “wildly unrealistic” and called it “a radical environmental policy.”
Critics do have a point. The investments needed would be massive, but proponents of the deal argue that not doing anything about climate change would cost even more over the long term…
The American Action Forum, a center-right organization, put the price tag at US$93 trillion.

Democrats have said the figure is way too inflated but the speardriver of the bill, Ocasio-Cortez has not argued about the fact it will be quite expensive to completely switch to renewables. She has, however, offered a way to foot the bill: by raising taxes for the very wealthy to 60-70 percent. That’s another thing many have called unrealistic as people are quick to migrate if their income is being threatened by higher taxes than they can stomach.

Amazing rant from Paul Driessen. All correct. I knew Dr. Happer would call time on man made Climate Change. It’s a fact free, science free zone. Expect explosions among the elites and the Democrats and the socialists. I suspect after 30 years of deceit since Al Gore and James Hansen opened the windows on June 23 1988 to tell their fairy tale of man made warming, people have had enough. These two issues will dominate elections, that uncontrolled migration is good for us and will make us richer and that refusing fossil fuels will make us richer and be good for us. No one believes either of these things, but that would make them deplorables I guess.

Woodside CEO Peter Coleman has come out swinging – but maybe his Coy saw this coming. Woodside has been busily drilling in offshore Myanmar for gas in the past 4 years and with success. You can’t blame them. They don’t have to deal with this “carbon emissions nonsense” there. So if the WA EPA get their way then expect oil & gas explorers currently involved in Oz to shift their focus to PNG (already happening) & prospective areas of Asia. Oz’s obsession with the “Paris Agreement” is going to end up very badly – a path to “economic self destruction” – destined to become the poor cousin in the “Asian Region”.

The climate metasis is destroying our democracies, our economies, and enriching themselves.
The catastrophist ideation disorder has infected the West and is rapidly dismantling our lives before our very eyes.
I hope the people of WA rise up and end this madness.

Unfortunately the centre right have allowed the far left to spread their socialism globalism propaganda for too long before taking them on and now man made global warming caused by carbon dioxide is accepted as a fact by at least half the population of voters. The claimed to be essential emissions reduction targeting is also accepted along with the free solar and wind energy claim.

The images repeated often of “dirty” coal fired power stations captured imaginations, people who do not know how coal produces electricity.

My point being that Tony Abbott MP is facing a Union Labor, Green, GetUp, Turnbull & Son challenge and the main focus of the challenging candidate is “climate change” and the claim that Abbott is old and out of touch.

It’s a similar argument used to explain why Howard lost to a buf00n like Rudd. There are other reasons as well but the general theme is voters get tired of the same old stuff even if it is the right stuff and instead prefer a change for change sake. It often ends in tears as was experienced with Rudd/Gillard. People never learn and keep repeating the same mistakes. History is jam packed with such examples. When the crash and burn eventuates I sincerely hope there are enough people around to make this nation great again. Otherwise, we can kiss it goodbye permanently and let China take over.

A group of Queensland Nats want the government to underwrite a new regional power station before the election, they also want the government to take out the big stick and stop the multinationals gouging.

The Libs are divided on the ‘big stick’ but the agrarian socialists have no qualms.

Then again, if the person speaking is the one who believes that we can fix climate change, she is an environmental lawyer so she has no real understanding of climate change, only what she has been told. As an example, she mentions rising sea levels etc which have been claimed for the last 20 or more years as one of the consequences of climate change but have not happened

WA Premier Mark McGowan: “I am concerned that the EPA has gone A BIT FAR here … but I do acknowledge their point that there needs to be a national solution to this issue.
“We will work with individual projects about offsetting opportunities.”…

I’m not so sure. The WA govt are letting the largest coal power station at Muja slowly and quietly die, and seem to now be saying that it can be replaced with renewables. WA has only 11% renewables and thus their energy costs are reasonable. Also thankfully WA is not connected to the “national” grid, so it’s energy costs are stable.

Well Dennis, if the gas industry was paying for dumping into the environment why would the EPA feel it necessary to take the steps it did? Industries that benefit, hmm, these would be like the makers of buggy whips and saddle soap in the old days, yes? Lastly, why are we exporting for half the price that middle eastern gas is sold at?

Dumping WHAT into the environment? And why would the selling price of gas matter? More importantly, previous Liberal govts setup an arrangement whereby 15% of gas has to be reserved for domestic use at reasonable prices. This is why WA doesn’t have the gas shortage problems of other states, and why 40% of our energy is derived from gas. These are the facts, not some wild assertion about “dumping”.

Graeme#4 If the C02 had a value, it would not be dumped, If said dumping attracted a cost, it would not occur. For the iron ore, where is the money to rehabilitate the mines? To my knowledge that will not occur, so the industry will degrade the environment at no cost to themselves

And how much can they take Bill in Oz? There is a limit, what do we do when we blow past that limit and their productivity decreases. By the way plants were here before we were, They don’t need us, or our pollution.

So PF what is the limit to CO2 concentration that we are going to “blow past” of which you are so scared? Give us a hard figure to laugh at, then go and look in any commercial greenhouse. For someone who claims botanical / fire modelling expertise you sure have a funny way of showing it.

So 1,000ppm is the limit for plant growth you say, which is “roughly double”, or as those of us who can do big sums like to call it — 2 ½ times the current atmospheric CO2 concentration.

Firstly, what makes you think that CO2 in the atmosphere is capable of reaching 1,000ppm through human activity when it is constantly being taken out of the system by plant life and geological sequestration? The rate of increase in CO2 concentration continues to fall far short of predictions for precisely those reasons. Plants just love to suck it up, in fact creating a localised CO2 deficiency within a couple of hours of sunrise once photosynthesis kicks in. Deficiency of CO2 is the norm and a severe limiting factor for most plants.

Secondly I call BS on your 1,000ppm CO2 limit for plants. Here are a few studies on plants’ reactions to extreme levels of CO2, way beyond 1,000ppm:

http://www.co2science.org/articles/V10/N50/B3.php
Eldarica Pine with CO2 up to 3,000ppm — “”the two trees responded identically to short-term atmospheric CO2 enrichment to about a tripling of the ambient CO2 concentration.” However, as the CO2 content of the air was increased further, they found that “the net CO2 assimilation responses of the two trees diverged: the photosynthetic response curve of the low-CO2-grown tree exhibited the classical form of a rate-limiting rectangular hyperbola, while that of the high-CO2-grown tree maintained its linearity to the highest CO2 concentration investigated.” At this latter CO2 concentration (3000 ppm), the photosynthetic rate of the low-CO2-grown tree had long since plateaued out at a value approximately five times that of its value at 360 ppm, while the photosynthetic rate of the high-CO2-grown tree was still rising linearly at a value approximately ten times greater than what it had exhibited at 360 ppm.” OOPS!

http://www.co2science.org/articles/V7/N30/B3.php
Loblolly Pine with CO2 up to 30,000ppm — “fresh weight of seedlings, needles per seedling, roots per seedling, and shoot length in loblolly pine seedlings increased 341%, 200%, 74%, and 75%, respectively, after 30 d exposure to 10,000 [ppm] CO2 over those obtained from seedlings grown [at] ambient CO2 levels,” but that there were no further increases – or DECREASES – when going from an atmospheric CO2 concentration of 10,000 ppm to one of 30,000 ppm.”
and
“tend to confirm the benefits of very high atmospheric CO2 levels for earth’s plants in general, augmenting the earlier findings of Tisserat et al. (1997) that “ultra-high CO2 levels enhance in vitro growth in several C-3 photosynthesis species.” OOPS!

So 10,000ppm = good for plants. Back to botany school for you boy. We can safely say that our plant life is in no danger from CO2 whatsoever.

If you believe that humans are responsible for all the highly beneficial rise in atmospheric CO2 since the LIA, as many AGW stall warts do, then you should realise that human CO2 has saved the planet from massive famines and the probable death of most plant species.

Plants just do not grow much at all once CO2 drops below 250ppm, and at sub 200 levels, as during the ice ages, there is very limited opportunity for growth, bare subsistence.

It would be similar to a human trying to survive on 1 slice of bread and a glass of water a day.

And as you well know, little-AOC, there is absolutely zero evidence that the current slightly raised atmospheric CO2 levels (from plant death levels) have had any detrimental affect on anything, or have had any affect on climate whatsoever.

Wrong, there is no near term practical limit, plants brought CO2 down from well over 4000ppm with no help from us. Indeed plants would do best at a pCO2 of 1500ppm or greater instead of starving to death which is pretty close to what they do on 400ppm.

Science free rhetoric from you as usual Peter, still trying to organise to freeze your granny to death next winter.

What’s so bad about Co2 and what makes you think they are dumping it ? They are carefully releasing it into the atmosphere where it is fertilising plants and greening the desert but of course if you have any proof to the contrary but no you don’t do you .
Maybe we should be paying them for doing that Co2 gentle release thing they do .

The dryland plants do benefit, as shown by the CSIRO (which is hated on this site) where they used a model (also hated by this site) and then took some measurements (Landsat I believe) which proved the model and therefore the hypothesis. Which must mean that this site respects the CSIRO now.
But…
The plants were also doing fine as they were, and certainly did not request more C02.
The C02 is a waste product, it is dumped into the atmosphere and therefore the environment.
The WA EPA is saying that this should attract a cost.

Cobalt poisoning is intoxication caused by excessive levels of cobalt in the body. Cobalt is an essential element for health in animals in minute amounts as a component of Vitamin B12. A deficiency of cobalt, which is very rare, is also potentially lethal, leading to pernicious anemia.

Also according to some Chinese research I came across they experimented with 400, 600, 800, 1000, 1200 PPM C02 on their commercially important crops, and found a bell curve response by the plants to increased levels of C02

The models are a furphy. Actual results show it is not a bell curve at all. Linear response up to 10,000ppm then a plateau, and no deleterious effects at 30,000ppm. See my response at 44.3.1.1.2. Stop plucking shyt out of thin air.

Oh dear Peter, I don’t suppose you “dump” any CO2 by breathing, or using gas, petrol, diesel, or plastics? And of course you pay extra when you fly “green”, and only pay for and use only “green” electricity when the sun is shining and the wind is blowing.

If ‘Peter Fitzroy’ was a commercial enterprise, it would have to pay, as it would be using the commonly held resources to make a profit. But we are as citizens entitled to ‘fair use’ of the commons, including public spaces and the environment.

Ian, thank you for the reminder that we need to be utterly uncompromising in our opposition to Big Green. Abbott was compromising and what did it get him? And where did it leave us? With a bent plutocrat posing as a Liberal to finish the job on behalf of the carpetbaggers and globalists. Now another snobbish, social-climbing cynic posing as a Labor man is waiting to commit further plunder.

Thanks for the reminder that party loyalty or fan-boyism will not save us from the poison of Paris. Simply removing hideous characters like Gillard and Turnbull won’t cut it. Forthright and immediate action against Big Green is needed.

Abbott did not “admit”, the Paris Agreement was signed in April 2016 and ratified in November 2016, signed in New York at the UN by Minister Hunt.

The Paris Conference took place late November into December 2015.

Prime Minister Abbott was replaced in September 2015.

What you are confusing is the agreement in his Cabinet, meaning a majority of Cabinet Ministers voted for, regarding the proposed emissions target that would be tabled at the Paris Conference. There was a memorandum released announcing Cabinet’s decision. You would find that Tony Abbott argued strongly for the lower target that Cabinet agreed on.

It amazes me that people want to blame Abbott by claiming incorrectly that he signed the Paris Agreement. Surely if the Paris Agreement is worthwhile PM Turnbull would claim ownership?

Dennis. This is what was written in the piece in The Australian yesterday

“The former prime minister said Australia no longer needed to leave the treaty he signed because Scott Morrison did not have an “emissions obsession” and he was confident the country would meet its Paris targets.”

What we know for sure is that too many of our leaders went weak-kneed at the thought of disapproval by the non-existent “world community”. The Paris poison should have been spat out – loudly.

I’m quite happy to have Ian point to Abbott’s possible role in this. Tony should have said no to Paris…and he should never have tolerated the presence of Malcolm Turnbull in his cabinet. Surely other Libs could see that Turnbull was a grasping, inarticulate oaf following a Davos/Bilderberg script he could barely pronounce.

…..we Australians own the local environment, just like we own the mineral resources, so we should be paid if commercial interests use it as a dump, don’t you think?

And therein Peter Fitzroy is where you have it face over apex.

We do NOT get paid. We are the ones who have to pay. Every commercial entity that will be forced to pay a TAX on their CO2 emissions will immediately pass that on to the end consumer, and we end up being at the bottom of that end consumer chain.

That was actually part of the legislation for the CO2 Tax when it was introduced.

7 Mar: DailyBusinessGroup: Demand for ‘level playing field’ as subsidised rivals win deals
by Terry Murden
Trade unions are furious that lucrative contracts for offshore wind farms have been awarded to overseas firms who are heavily supported by state subsidies.
The GMB at BiFab and Unite have today demanded a ‘level playing field’ if Scotland is to secure the large-scale manufacturing contracts from its own offshore renewables sector – and they are asking the First Minister and the Scottish Parliament to intervene.
Their call coincides with the launch of an initiative from UK Energy and Clean Growth Minister Claire Perry to support the UK supply chain in ensuring 30% of British power is generated by wind by 2030.
Ms Perry says it is the Government’s ambition to make the UK a global leader in renewables “with more investment potential than any other country in the world”. Industry will invest £250 million in the new Offshore Wind Growth Partnership.

But unions in Scotland says lucrative contracts for the fabrication of turbine jackets and floating platforms from the Moray East and Kincardine offshore wind farm projects were awarded to firms in the UAE, Belgium and Spain, leaving empty handed BiFab yards in Fife.
Unions say that despite the best efforts of BiFab owner DF Barnes – which yesterday announced a smaller contract for its Arnish yard – the firm “cannot realistically compete for major contracts on the basis of cost against European and international competitors who are heavily backed by state subsidies and sovereign wealth funds.”…

GMB Scotland Secretary, Gary Smith and Unite Scotland Secretary Pat Rafferty said: “Ten years ago we were promised a ‘Saudi Arabia of Renewables’ but today we need political intervention to help level the playing field in Scottish offshore renewables manufacturing.
“The truth is that state funded European energy and engineering firms, backed by Far East finance and Middle East sovereign wealth funds, are carving-up thousands of jobs and billions of pounds from our renewables sector, and firms like BiFab are left fighting for scraps off our own table.
“That one hundred per cent of the manufacturing of the turbine jackets for Moray East and five platforms for Kincardine will be done in yards outside of Scotland is an absolute scandal. This cannot continue unchallenged.”

“To working class communities in Burntisland and Methil there’s no ‘just transition’ or ‘green jobs revolution’ here, just a future that looks heavily rigged against their hopes for employment and prosperity. That’s the real cost of long-term political failure at all levels of government.”
“The Scottish Government and the public have a stake in BiFab and with it our renewables manufacturing future; we owe it to our ourselves to tackle the spaghetti bowl of vested interest groups that’s dominating our renewables sector and to fight for Scotland’s share.”…https://dailybusinessgroup.co.uk/2019/03/unions-demand-level-playing-field-amid-new-wind-target/

7 Mar: UK Times: Britain needs a green new deal to revive its economy after Brexit
by Miatta Fahnbulleh (Chief Executive, New Economics Foundation)
Britain needs a new economy that works for everyone and to move beyond the old, broken systems and status quo that left many people behind.
A green new deal for the UK could give us just that. Climate change has muscled its way back onto the political agenda. It was debated by MPs last week for the first time in two years.
It seems that the momentum around Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Senator Ed Markey’s green new deal in the US, the audacious climate march on Westminster by schoolchildren last month and increasingly rising temperatures may have finally jolted our politicians out of their climate stupor.

Four months ago, a group of experts on the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) delivered the news that the world must halve carbon emissions in a little over a decade. Responding would require an almighty push to green our economy – one that would touch on every aspect of our lives. Despite this stark warning from scientists, the political establishment in Westminster barely flinched. There was no commitment to redouble our efforts, no renewed urgency or call to action. Instead, our politics continued to be consumed by Brexit.

But the IPCC report was a sobering wake-up call for many. A movement of activists in the US, backed by a new generation of Democrats, including the Justice Democrats, are reacting with the urgency needed. The green new deal – an idea that came from organisations including the New Economics Foundation (NEF) a decade ago – has emerged as a forceful response. The idea is simple: an unprecedented mobilisation of resources to achieve 100 per cent renewable energy and eliminating greenhouse gas emissions within a decade while creating millions of jobs and lifting living standards…https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/0ab3eb08-403c-11e9-aa0a-30b9d78dd63b

Wikipedia: In February 2010 the New Economics Foundation called for gradual transition to a working week of 21 hours…
The organisation’s current projects include work on community-based housing, worker organising in the digital economy, restoring local banking and challenging xenophobia and racism in the Brexit debate…
NEF is a registered charity and is funded by individual supporters, public finance businesses and international grant-giving bodies.

Most voters view Green New Deal as ‘largely socialist’, (Harris) poll shows
The Hill-28 Feb 2019
Two-thirds of voters say they view the recently introduced Green New Deal being advocated by progressive lawmakers as “largely socialist”…

6 Mar: Investor’sBusinessDaily: Green New Deal Support May Cost Politicians Votes: IBD/TIPP Poll
by Terry Jones
Among those queried by the poll, 43% said they would be “less likely to vote for” a candidate who supported the Green New Deal, or GND. Just 30% said they would be “more likely” to do so. Another 25% said it wouldn’t affect their decision.
Not surprisingly, a sharp partisan split exists among those who took part in the poll…
Raghavan Mayur, president of TechnoMetrica Market Intelligence, which conducted the poll: “Independents are more likely to view Green New Deal candidates in an unfavorable light.”…

The Green New Deal has come in for harsh criticisms over both cost and the sweeping nature of its regulations and taxes. The American Action Forum (AAF), which is headed by former Congressional Budget Office Director Douglas Holtz-Eakin, estimated a total cost of between $51 trillion and $93 trillion over 10 years.

Placed in context, the CBO has estimated that total government spending over the next decade will be roughly $57.82 trillion, with government taking an amount roughly equal to 22% of total estimated GDP during that time.

***The Green New Deal could raise the government’s share of the economy to as much as 57% and require an increase in taxes of 160%.

7 Mar: CNBC: Exxon Mobil CEO says support for Ocasio-Cortez’s Green New Deal may soon waver. Here’s why
by Tom DiChristopher
But eventually those big ideas will require action, says Exxon Chairman and CEO Darren Woods, and that’s when the tide of public opinion could begin to turn against the Green New Deal.
“Energy is such an important part of people’s daily lives and their standards of living that as you think about these big ideas and translate them down to smaller practical steps you take, people become very cognizant of what the impacts are for individuals,” Woods said in an interview Wednesday with CNBC’s Becky Quick. The interview aired Thursday on “Squawk Box.”
“And as that starts to happen, I think people’s view change as to how far they can go and how quickly they can go.”…

But independent researchers and former Obama administration staffers also say racing to decarbonize the economy could backfire (LINK). Part of the reason policymakers have historically set mid-century goals is because the timeline would allow them to reduce greenhouse gas emissions without disrupting daily life and sparking political backlash, like the Yellow Vest protests that rocked France last year…

6 Mar: Guardian Editorial: The Guardian view on the biggest privatisation: the land beneath our feet
As ***Brett Christophers, a professor of economic geography, points (LINK) out in our pages, almost 10% of land has been transferred from public into private ownership since Thatcher came to power…
Last year the New Economics Foundation pointed out that the government’s target of building 160,000 homes by selling off public land was 12 years behind schedule and would take until 2032 to achieve…

***Brett Christophers is Professor in the Department of Social and Economic Geography at Uppsala University, Sweden:

TWEET: Brett Christophers:
Been thinking more about this. Because the FT details capitalism’s workings incomparably well, it is an unrivalled source for critque thereof.
Marx would have f**king *loved* the FT. He wouldn’t have had to spend all that time in the British Library.
7 Mar 2019
Mike Beggs:
Amber A’Lee Frost on why the discerning leftist prefers the FT (LINK CJR)https://twitter.com/bceagle71/status/1103656338540904449

Columbia Journalism Review: Why the Left Can’t Stand The New York Times
By Amber A’Lee Frost
Winter 2019
Every morning that I’m not hungover, I wake up around 8am, because that is when my two cats start howling for breakfast. I feed them, make coffee, and walk barefoot and unwashed (mug in hand) through my apartment building’s common hallway to the front door, where I pick up my New York Times and my Financial Times.

I then walk back to my apartment, look at the front page of the New York Times for approximately five to eight seconds, and throw the whole thing in the garbage with contempt. I drink my coffee and proceed to read the entirety of the Financial Times, excluding the particularly dense bits of the Companies & Markets section. If it’s the weekend edition, I even read most of House & Home, whose editors seem to have an incredibly generous definition of “real estate,” making room for topics like homelessness and wildlife conservation…

7 Mar: news.com.au: Climate change sceptics push to ban teaching global warming facts
A growing number of politicians in the US are trying to introduce laws that would allow teachers to dismiss the scientific consensus that global warming is man-made.
by AP & staff
VIDEO: 1min27sec: Climate Change: we’re heading for doom (Attenborough etc)

In Connecticut, a politician wants to strike climate change from state science standards. Meanwhile in Virginia, a legislator worries teachers are indoctrinating students with their personal views on global warming. And an Oklahoma state senator wants educators to be able to introduce alternative ideas without fear of losing their jobs.

PIC: Students gather to demand the government take action on climate change at Martin Place on November 30, 2018 in Sydney, Australia

Of the more than a dozen such measures proposed so far this year, some already have failed. But they have emerged this year in growing numbers, many of them inspired or directly encouraged by a pair of advocacy groups.
One group is The Heartland Institute, a conservative think-tank group based in Illinois best known for working with the tobacco company Philip Morris in the 1990s to attempt to discredit the health risks of smoking cigarettes.
The Heartland Institute does not disclose its funding sources.
Climate scientists have blasted such proposals for sowing confusion and doubt…

Australian students striking for climate change want adults to join them for a global event on March 15, and organisers say they already have support from a growing number of unions…
This time they are also urging adults to back the strike and also walk out for the day in solidarity…

This year’s event is already being supported by a growing number of unions including the National Union of Workers, National Tertiary Education Union, United Firefighters Union, Hospo Voice, the Victorian Allied Health Professionals Association and the National Union of Students.
The National Union of Workers, one of the most powerful unions in the Labor Party and part of its right-wing faction that supports Opposition Leader Bill Shorten, said it was supporting the strike and the students standing together collectively for their future.
“They are inspiring leaders, and we support them in making our political leaders listen,” the union said…

PIC: Students demonstrate in Paris on March 1, 2019 to protest against climate change, part of a Europe-wide movement that has seen walkouts across the continent.

More than 300 academics have also signed an open letter (LINK) in solidarity with the student strikers supporting their stance against Adani’s Carmichael mine and a ban on gas mining…

“The whole thing is unravelling,” says Prof David Bowman, who studies the impacts of climate change and fire on trees at the University of Tasmania. “Most people have no idea that it’s even happening. The system is trying to tell you that if you don’t pay attention then the whole thing will implode. We have to get a grip on climate change.”…

According to the 2018 State of the Climate Report, produced by CSIRO and the Bureau of Meteorology, large parts of the country are experiencing increases in weather patterns favourable to fires. The report found that rainfall has dropped in the south-east and south-west of the country, temperatures have warmed by an average of 1C, and a “shift to a warmer climate in Australia is accompanied by more extreme daily heat events”…

6 Mar: Climate change puts additional pressure on vulnerable frogs
Already devastated by a fungus made worse by changing temperatures, Australia’s frogs are at risk because of water availability and lack of refuge

4 Mar: Out of sight, out of luck: the hidden victims of Australia’s deadly heatwaves
Extreme weather events are causing severe damage to native flora and fauna, but the casualties are slipping under the radar

Frogs are very good in Australia at burrowing deep in the ground and sleeping through droughts. In the deserts they sleep deep in the ground for years.

Some frog species did go extinct in the 1990′s & 2000′s. Why >

Because they had no resistance to an exotic chritdrid fungus introduced into the Australian aquatic environment and in the Americas. How did the fungus get here ? Probably in the water or in the bodies of aquarium fish brought into Australia from overseas – Asia most likely…And probably spread to Australian river systems by enthusiastic & bloody ignorant fish collectors or even frog collectors…..

7 Mar: ClimateChangeNews: The Conversation: The Green New Deal contains a tension between climate and social goals
The original New Deal spurred a massive increase in greenhouse gas emissions, so can it be successfully adapted for the transition away from fossil fuels?
By Matthew Paterson, Professor of International Politics at the University of Manchester
So the challenge is enormous. But of course, the effect of much of the Green New Deal – to invest in infrastructure, to redistribute income – will be to generate significant economic growth. Indeed, this is the point – to get the US economy out of its present stagnation.
But it’s hard to see how this will be done without generating new sources of carbon emissions – more housing, more cars and more consumption generally…
If one imperative is to build new infrastructure to get the US economy going, how much of this will really do more than pay lip service to the energy system transformation in practice?…

5 Mar: Fox News op-ed: The Trump economy is going gangbusters (and even liberal economists are starting to admit it)
by Jon Hartley
(Jon Hartley is an economic policy analyst, researcher and writer based in New York and is a regular economics contributor at Forbes among other outlets)
VIDEO: 4min25sec: US economy hottest in the world: Larry Kudlow.

Last week it was reported that the U.S. economy expanded by 2.9 percent in 2018, when measured from the 2017 annual level to the 2018 annual level. By a different metric, one that measures from the fourth quarter of 2017 to the fourth quarter of 2018, the economy expanded by 3.1 percent.
This is a growth rate unmatched since 2005, according to the Commerce Department’s Bureau of Economic Analysis’ economic activity report…

***The near 3 percent growth rate of 2018 flies in the face of the “secular stagnation” hypothesis (promulgated by economists like Larry Summers), which said that returning to 3 percent growth was unrealistic or impossible in the post-Great Recession era of low-interest rates and low aggregate demand. According to this theory, the U.S. economy would be paralyzed from growing beyond 1-2 percent.
However, this idea has undergone rethinking by liberal Nobel Prize-winning economists like Joseph Stiglitz…

The booming 2018 GDP figure also follows a significant deregulatory agenda pursued by the administration over the past two years. The Trump administration has cut approximately 20 federal rules for every new one introduced, and new federal rules have fallen to record lows in modern history, according to the George Washington University Regulatory Studies Center…

But with materially better macroeconomic figures like near 3 percent GDP growth and 2-plus percent wage growth (the latter never seen in the Obama years), even some liberal economists are capitulating…
One notable one, Alan Blinder, recently wrote in the Wall Street Journal, “The tax cuts seem to have boosted growth without exciting inflation,” and that his previous worry that “tax cuts might overheat an already-hot economy” increasingly “appears to have been wrong, at least so far”.
With these bright figures manifesting themselves in the wake of tax reform, a new pro-growth narrative is clearly forming and the Trump administration deserves some level of credit…https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/the-trump-economy-is-going-gangbusters-and-even-liberal-economists-are-starting-to-admit-it

CNN’s Cillizza has TDS real bad, yet he has now reported:

Here’s the best poll # for Donald Trump this year
Analysis by Chris Cillizza, CNN Editor-at-large
CNN – 6 Mar 2019 Updated 7 Mar 2019
But, lo and behold, there’s a new poll from Gallup that actually contains some very good news for Trump: 56% of the public approve of the job he is doing with the economy…
If history is any guide, the strength of the economy — and, as importantly, whether Americans perceive the economy as strong or weak — is a major indicator of an incumbent’s chances of winning re-election…
CNN’s Harry Enten noted last December:
“It turns out there has been a clear correlation between said job growth and the ultimate election result. If the economy has the same job growth over the final two years of Trump’s first term as it has over the first two years (about 3%), history suggests Trump would be favored to win by a few points.”…

We’ve got to remember that this is the intellectual pygmy who has expressed a view during his brief and undistinguished stint as Australian prime minister that the laws of mathematics are subordinate to the dictates of parliament.

The first step in retrieving Australian prosperity must be repeal of the RET.

An activist judge in NSW, the EPA in WA…don’t let’s kid ourselves that unchecked this is not the beginning of a swift annihilation of our nation.

It seems I’ve massively mistimed my run to the tomb as I have no appetite for living through the inescapable miserable times which are to be our living destiny.

Where is the leadership? All we get is policies repeatedly readjusted by focus group green regarding machinations which is no way to run a country.

I used to think Turnbull was as low as a person could go . . . then I saw his son in full foul frothing mode on Twitter. That family pot definitely needs skimming. Way too much scum has risen to the top.

The unfortunate thing is that we never got to see what Tony Abbott could have achieved. He made mistakes, yet if not for the white-anting Turnbull he would have had time to learn and move on. We lost a potentially great Prime Minister when Turnbull usurped the top job.

Turnbull’s thrust at the prime ministership was all about ego. He has a lot to answer for.

Our nation is poorer for not realising the full potential of Tony Abbott.

Johnny Howard should be self-flagellating for his ill-conceived act of talking Turnbull into staying in the Libs after he was ousted the first time around. MT had shown his colours; he had form. What the hell was Howard smoking?

Theresa May is of course giving Big Mal a run for his money in the race for Worst Prime Minister Ever. They are both exceptional, duplicitous country-wreckers, but I think May is winning.

Try to imagine what his political opponents went through, Opposition Leader Brendan Nelson after a year in that position and Opposition Leader/Prime Minister Tony Abbott over a 6 year period.

Most people have little of no interest in politics and political history is quickly forgotten. Malcolm Turnbull arranged for what is described as the biggest branch stacking exercise in our history to succeed sitting Liberal MP Peter King, to replace him as the candidate for election in Wentworth, to enter Parliament. He destabilised the Howard Government (see stopturnbull history website) and continued undermining first Opposition Leader Brendan Nelson and then Opposition Leader/Prime Minister Abbott, and anyone else that got in his way, like Deputy Prime Minister Barnaby Joyce.

I don’t know about Oz, but in the USA it has become a real problem, that they do in practice make policy. It is a short circuit of the how the government was set up by the Framers with separation of powers. It is cancer that has been growing for at least 100 years since what is called historically the Progressive Era. When the US EPA was empowered under Nixon in the early 1970′s Congress effectively gave them a blank check to work out the details of the how such laws as the Clean Air Act would be enacted going forward. This is why the Supreme Court did not strike down the ridiculous Endangerment Finding that they use to regulate harmless and beneficial co2. The Court basically said that was Congress’s job to reign in the EPA not theirs. Under Obama the cancer of unelected bureaucrats effectively making, and enforcing, the law, went to full blown mastication, and threatens the very life of country.

This is why the deep state and the media have Trump Derangement Syndrome. It is really a civil cold war (so far) about if sovereignty resides in the citizenry or with the government class including the UN.

A lot of these projects are shifting to offshore floating facilities like Shell Prelude due to changes in technology but also because they are outside state jurisdiction and only come under federal laws. Its costing WA billions already.

And I just received email from my brother-in law quoting Ian Plimer as follows about carbon dioxide. I can’t find a thing wrong with what he says. Can you?

Ian Rutherford Plimer is an Australian geologist, professor emeritus of earth sciences at the University of Melbourne, professor of mining geology at the University of Adelaide, and the director of multiple mineral exploration and mining companies.

He has published 130 scientific papers, six books and edited the Encyclopedia of Geology. Sounds pretty learned/credible, don’t you think?

These are his extensive credentials:

Born
12 February 1946

Residence
Australia

Nationality
Australian

Fields
Earth Science, Geology,

Mining Engineering

Institutions
University of New England,

University of Newcastle,

University of Melbourne,

University of Adelaide

Alma mater
University of New South Wales,

Macquarie University

Thesis
The pipe deposits of tungsten-

molybdenum-bismuth in eastern

Australia (1976)

Notable awards
Eureka Prize (1995, 2002),

Centenary Medal(2003),

Clarke Medal (2004)

Where Does the Carbon Dioxide Really Come From?

Professor Ian Plimer’s book in a brief summary:

PLIMER : “Okay, here’s the bombshell. The volcanic eruption in Iceland. Since its first spewing of volcanic ash, it has, in just FOUR DAYS, NEGATED EVERY SINGLE EFFORT you have made in the past five years to control CO2 emissions on our planet – all of you.

Of course, you know about this evil carbon dioxide that we are trying to suppress – it’s that vital chemical compound that every plant requires to live and grow and to synthesize into oxygen for us humans and all animal life.

I know….it’s very disheartening to realize that all of the carbon emission savings you have accomplished while suffering the inconvenience and expense of driving Prius hybrids, buying fabric grocery bags, sitting up till midnight to finish your kids “The Green Revolution” science project, throwing out all of your non-green cleaning supplies, using only two squares of toilet paper, putting a brick in your toilet tank reservoir, selling your SUV and speedboat, vacationing at home instead of abroad,nearly getting hit every day on your bicycle, replacing all of your 50 cent light bulbs with $10.00 light bulbs…..well, all of those things you have done have all gone down the tubes in just four days!

The volcanic ash emitted into the Earth’s atmosphere in just four days – yes, FOUR DAYS – by that volcano in Iceland has totally erased every single effort you have made to reduce the evil beast, carbon. And there are around 200 active volcanoes on the planet spewing out this crud at any one time – EVERY DAY.

I don’t really want to rain on your parade too much,

but I should mention that when the volcano Mt Pinatubo erupted in the Philippines in 1991, it spewed out more greenhouse gases into the atmosphere than the entire human race had emitted in all its years on earth.

Yes, folks, Mt Pinatubo was active for over One year – think about it.

Of course, I shouldn’t spoil this ‘touchy-feely tree-hugging’ moment and mention the effect of natural solar and cosmic activity, and the well-recognized 800-year global heating and cooling cycle, which keeps happening despite our completely insignificant efforts to affect climate change.

And I do wish I had a silver lining to this volcanic ash cloud, but the fact of the matter is that the wildfire season across the western USA and Australia this year alone will negate your efforts to reduce carbon in our world for the next two to three years. And it happens every year.

Just remember that your government just tried to impose a whopping carbon tax on you, on the basis of the BOGUS ‘human-caused’ climate-change scenario.

Hey, isn’t it interesting how they don’t mention ‘Global Warming’ anymore, but just ‘Climate Change.

It’s because the planet has COOLED by 0.7 degrees in the past century and these global warming advocates got caught with their pants down.

And, just keep in mind that you might yet have an Emissions Trading Scheme – that whopping new tax – imposed on you by your government, that will achieve absolutely nothing except make you poorer.

It won’t stop any volcanoes from erupting, that’s for sure.

But, hey, …..go give the world a hug and have a nice day

The copy and paste doesn’t work out quite right for a little of it but nonetheless, how could you say it any better or more thoroughly?

These are all things anyone with a real interest in the truth could verify well enough to become a skeptic. Yet here it all is in one place and handed to people on a silver platter but it makes no impact. Innumeracy reigns supreme. The fact that 100 is greater than 10, for example, seems to mean nothing.

Just to explain, and if you need it explaining then FFS, read up on it, it’s important!

“Kalergi urged not only the destruction of European states, but also the deliberate genocide of indigenous peoples through forced mass migration to create a homogeneous mass.

The Kalergi in his own words:

“(European) man of the future will be mixed races. Today’s races and classes will disappear due to the disappearance of space (nations) and time.”

The Pan-European plan of Kalergi envisaged the use of violent and disproportionate mass immigration, especially from non-European countries, in order to bring about a common European state dictatorship and the destruction of the indigenous white population – the nationalities of Europe.

Intentional and violent immigration in any country in order to colonize and destroy is one of the most extreme racist doctrines

They say that the supporter of the plan of Kallergi is Soros and the Rothschild family. By the way, in the European Union there is a special Charlemagne Prize and the first one awarded is Kallergi.

In his works, Kudenhove-Kalergi showed that if there are no nations, then there will be no borders – therefore a single community will be created.”

Yep. Big Green is just the pointy end of something bigger. It’s the reason given for the hollowing out of industry in the West and the shrinking of middle class which has been the ballast of Western society. (It’s certainly not about conservation of anything!)

Unending wars, unpayable debt, constant demographic shocks, dilution of family, forced cultural mixing, micro-surveillance through IT advances, “smart” everything…all of these things work for the now totally active Kalergi plan. Many don’t notice or don’t see the whole for the pieces. But the plan is advancing.

Media fakery may seem clumsy, like they’ve stopped even trying, but it is actually testing limits. Not long ago the leader of N Korea was a monster who fed his relatives to dogs and probably took beautiful babies out of their incubators. Now he’s an amusing figure to chuckle at and maybe respect a bit. Yes, there are strategic reasons for the slave media’s manipulation of his image, but I also think there’s an element of experiment, to see how far they can take it. Not ten years ago the Space Kingdom of Asgardia with its bizarre globalist aspirations would have been laughed out of a circus. Now it’s a thing, heavily funded and UN supported. Are we being softened up for alien arrival or some other mega-fakery?

Kalergi is Luciferian, it is very real and very far advanced. There is no mass remedy or counter-manipulation possible. The only remedy is spirituality, which can best be defined as the abandonment of all manipulation by individual souls. The remedy is the one power Luciferians do not get. They can’t see it as power. Manipulation is their all, and that is their weakness.

I know I’ll be laughed at for these propositions. But however ridiculous I make myself, I’ll never be as ridiculous as any edition of any major journal on any day you care to name.

Ian, you again claimed that PM Tony Abbott signed the Paris Agreement. You claimed it was written in The Australian.

I repeat …

PM Tony Abbott was replaced by PM Malcolm Turnbull in September 2015.
The Paris Conference was held late November 2015 and ended in December 2015 in Paris France.
The Paris Agreement was signed in April 2016 at the UN in New York USA by the Minister.
The Paris Agreement was ratified in November 2016 at the UN in New York by the Minister.

Why would Tony Abbott MP say that he signed the Paris Agreement when clearly he did not sign it?

However, the PM Abbott Cabinet of Ministers reached agreement on the emissions reduction target that the Minister would take to Paris at the end of 2015 earlier in that year and there was a media release outlining the Cabinet decision. For your information Ian most often Cabinet decisions are subject to a vote and the majority decision is carried.

The fact remains that two months before the Paris CONFERENCE commenced in Paris France Tony Abbott was no longer the Prime Minister, and he did not go to Paris.

Mosomoso, unfortunately many people failed to see what had been going on in the Liberal Party, the rise of Malcolm Turnbull leading his Liberals In Name Only MPs, they refer to themselves as the Black Hand faction, was a destabilising influence even during the Howard Government years.

When Tony Abbott was drafted into the leadership late in 2009 his support base was marginal and the Turnbull base remained in a strong position. Despite the landslide election victory, the defeat of Labor in September 2013 with Opposition Leader Abbott leading the Coalition the destabilising continued. Relentless negativity. In fact from 2009 and continuing the Turnbull BH faction even used Labor aligned GetUp to undermine their leader plotting to replace him with their leader. This resulted in the Coalition’s public image being damaged as well as Tony Abbott. Until their strategies convinced a small majority of Liberal MPs to vote against Tony Abbott in September 2015 in favour of Malcolm Turnbull becoming Prime Minister Prime Minister Abbott was handicapped in Cabinet and often lost the vote on matters discussed, BoM audit for example.

Please consider: “When the non-Labor parties have been in power, the Prime Minister has advised the Governor-General on all Cabinet and ministerial appointments at his own discretion, although in practice he consults with senior colleagues in making appointments. When the Liberal Party and its predecessors (the Nationalist Party and the United Australia Party) have been in coalition with the National Party or its predecessor the Country Party, the leader of the junior Coalition party has had the right to nominate his party’s members of the Coalition ministry, and to be consulted by the Prime Minister on the allocation of their portfolios.”

Consultation, Prime Minster Abbott needed to consult his MP colleagues about who they wanted in his Cabinet.

The Turnbull BH faction had considerable influence and as a result Turnbull was appointed Minister for Communications and BH faction MPs held other portfolios.

Great post on the madness of the Aus EPA trying to do an end run around the elected government and get their religious beliefs implemented. Guess they wanted to see if the government would dare to oppose their ideas. I think it’s just another straw of pressure they think will eventually make elected governments cave in to their demands. Shell, BP, Exxon, Woodside, BHP etc. should now understand what their buy in to the warming scare might mean for their businesses.

One thing though, did you really mean to imply that the Venus Fly Trap does not need CO2? Last time I looked these plants are green and use photosynthesis to fix atmospheric Carbon from CO2 in order to build cell walls etc. as other plants do. The trapping of insects is an evolutionary answer to overcome the low nutrient soils they grow in i.e. they get goodies like phosphates from their victims. Not sure if they can also strip carbon from the bodies but it would seem a waste of energy when it is readily available in the air.

I don’t want to be a nit picker but science is science and as I get older it’s the little mistakes or omissions that seem to bother me more and more. I’m no biologist so maybe I’m wrong. Cheers:)

The politics of the WA EPA got too hot for the WA government. Hotter than even
the topic of Anthropogenic Global Warming and its fear mongering that got our
poorly educated children onto the streets with their even less poorly trained
science teachers.

McGowan and the Treasurer dumped the EPA demand for equivalent anti CO2 measures to
be forced on companies investing in this State.

Hey! That means that at least in this State, WA, politicians have at last been forced to
admit the future economic doom for any State or nation that goes with the full kit and empty
craniums aiming to delete carbon dioxide from our atmosphere. They can see we are all doomed
as in the Game of Thrones to become zombies if we wish to walk the planet under these conditions.
This is the first indication that a politician has actually looked into the future and blinked
at the effects of extremist greens policies. And these are Labor people.

Now wouldn’t it be nice if Victorians, or at least Mr Andrews, was educated enough to also have a
soothsayer have him look into the future of absent reliable power and get the same nightmares for his
future as McGowan and his Treasurer have had for the future of his State. Similarly, what does this say
for the jellyback coalition MP’s that we vaguely consider to have just a little advantage in the intelligence
stakes of how economies function???

I wonder if those ‘striking’ juveniles from our leftist controlled education system and Universities have just
a little semblance of that superiority of intellect that they presume themselves to have over older Australians
- anyone above 35yo(?) – and pull themselves up short, contemplate this heresy by a labor government and go the
next step to question themselves, their (‘taught’) science, their implacable teachers and headmasters about just
where this is all leading, what their lifestyles are soon to become – under their own demands – and just how
real and reliable is this so called science. Who knows? They might soon be crazy enough to ask the unaskable
question of their teachers ie ‘what’s the earth history and proof that allows you to teach this unbelievable nonsense based on
extreme fear campaigns you use to indoctrinate us?”